About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-199407.3 1 (1982-11-17)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadksl0001 and id is 1 raw text is: rt lus 1\ THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL OECISION . ' OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON, 0. C. 20549 UITED. FILE: B-199407.3 DATE: November 17, 1982 MATTER OF: The Jonathan Corporation--Reconsideration DIGEST: Decision is affirmed on reconsideration in absence of any showing that earlier decision was based on errors of fact or law. The Jonathan Corporation (Jonathan) requests reconsideration of our decision in The Jonathan Corpora- tion, B-199407.2, September 23, 1982, 82-2 CPD 260, wherein we Jenied Jonathan's protest against the Navy's source selection procedure and contract award to Milcom Systems Corporation (Milcom). Ne found that the Navy was not shown to have erred in deciding that the technical proposals of Jonathan and Milcom were essentially equal and conse- quently award could be made to Milcom on the basis of lowest total evaluated cost. Jonathan now contends that our decision failed to address Jonathan's two principal arguments: (1) that the contracting officer acted in bad faith by deceptively editing the 'aval Electronic Systems Engineering Center's (NESEC) technical recommendations to make it appear that they supported and corroborated his determination; and (2) the contracting officer failed to record why the proposals were scored technically equal aside from a mere point score comparison. Neither contention is a sufficient basis to overturn our prior decision. In our opinion, the contracting officer did not deceptively edit the NESEC technical recom- mendations. The Navy reported that the contracting officer had only sought NESEC's assistance in order to see if an award to the highest technically scored firm, Jonathan, could be justified at a price $159,000 higher than the other apparently technically equal offeror, Milcom. We noted in our decision that NESEC never directly answered the question regarding technical equality, but instead replied that an award under subject solicitation to either firm in line for award technically is acceptable. Jonathan's allegation of bad faith and deception is based upon the contracting officer's omission of the following unsolicited NESEC comment in its request for a

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most